Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety bar is low. The description nonetheless adds behavior the annotations cannot express: the returned link expires in 24 h, each exported row consumes the plan's monthly quota, and a preview shows the first rows before committing.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences: output shape first, prerequisites second, cost/expiry third. The column enumeration earns its space because there is no output schema. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an export tool with no output schema, it covers the important unknowns: returned columns, link lifetime, quota consumption, and preview behavior. Missing only details like the truncated-vs-complete preview boundary and how max_rows interacts with quota.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Coverage is 64%, and the description only adds the high-level 'category + location' requirement, which the schema already enforces via required. It says nothing about require_phone/require_website defaults, min_confidence, or max_rows cost implications, so the four undocumented parameters remain unexplained on both sides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Build a lead list as a CSV download link'), enumerates the per-row columns, and names its two hard prerequisites. The CSV-download framing effectively separates it from search_places and get_place, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Needs a category and a location' gives the entry conditions, and the quota sentence hints this is a costly bulk operation rather than a browse call. But there is no explicit 'use search_places for interactive lookup, use this for bulk export' routing, so the agent must infer the choice relative to siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.